Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 777872E00A1
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2008 08:25:50 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 22602-05 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2008 08:25:46 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from beaver.fastcrypt.com (beaver.fastcrypt.com [64.7.141.17])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D512E00A3
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2008 08:25:46 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [192.168.1.14] (dcdsl.ebox.com [64.7.143.116])
	by beaver.fastcrypt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5CF2158040C;
	Sun, 16 Mar 2008 07:31:49 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>,
 pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Message-Id: <F38ADB71-8F77-41C8-9066-488FFCA7BD67@fastcrypt.com>
From: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
To: Justin <justin@emproshunts.com>
In-Reply-To: <47DCBBF9.1090401@emproshunts.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Subject: Re: Benchmark: Dell/Perc 6, 8 disk RAID 10
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 07:25:41 -0400
References: <f966c2ee0803052142l6a105678jfe2da92a0d9371@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0803060813570.11897@westnet.com>
	<47D00DB2.7040007@emolecules.com> <18451.1204824562@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<47D0AFC1.5070305@emolecules.com>
	<08115901408538@mail.emproshunts.com>
	<47D93A43.6020503@emolecules.com>
	<016301c8854e$851e06e0$3101a8c0@JDell>
	<dcc563d10803132312o1539215fk859bbae03f36e566@mail.gmail.com>
	<47DA1866.3050500@krogh.cc>
	<dcc563d10803132319u19480a4fn16115c415ee57844@mail.gmail.com>
	<47DA37E1.6050104@emproshunts.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0803140359220.20241@westnet.com>
	<47DA5852.30004@emproshunts.com> <47DCBBF9.1090401@emproshunts.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200803/333
X-Sequence-Number: 29287


On 16-Mar-08, at 2:19 AM, Justin wrote:

>
> I decided to reformat the raid 10 into ext2 to see if there was any  
> real big difference in performance as some people have noted   here  
> is the test results
>
> please note the WAL files are still on the raid 0 set which is still  
> in ext3 file system format.  these test where run with the fsync as  
> before.   I made sure every thing was the same as with the first test.
>
This is opposite to the way I run things. I use ext2 on the WAL and  
ext3 on the data. I'd also suggest RAID 10 on the WAL it is mostly  
write.

Dave